Agenda 21 total take over

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by lasvegasteddy
reply to post by crankySamurai

 

i wonder how many are aware of the un's unesco heritage sites the UN currently holds right to protect and govern much of the worlds most treasured places "above ownership"

Who could possibly be opposed to UNESCO protecting these amazing sites? Not me, until I read what you said, that they grant themselves rights "above ownership".

I went to the website you linked but it does not say anything about that (surprise). Can you provide the source, please?

simple reply as why oppose...if UN decides for protection of sites...no people will be allowed...they call in foregin standing armies of theirs to enforce this (see article 5 address #2 )...link to resource here...whc.unesco.org...

yes where the LoN failed it was studied...the UN has standing armies (100k strength there or about)

how would you like to only see the beauty of yosemite in pictures/videos only as "it's been closed off any & all public access"

hence this very thread i'm replying in is about agenda 21 to begin with...barring people from land in name of lands protection is but one address

one must have a working knowledge of how the UN works and words things...i strongly advise anyone to watch edward griffin's "the grand design" to understand better covert strategy...and afterwards...replace "grand design" with the "United Nations"...it's chillingly accurate and paints the future

agenda 21 is ugly once full power is in effect...one only need look up one of many web hits on agenda 21 in perceptive map form

of note...when they reference states...it is states "under" UN governorship..."member states"

a quick add...watch a secretary of state make a speech at a CFR meeting here...www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by lasvegasteddy

 

Stop spreading crap.

They do not have the right to "govern" these areas.

All the world heritage committee does is address any problems that may come up with a heritage site, and provide resources or money for preservation as requested.

any opposition to your belief is crap...hmmm
funding...i guess you haven't researched that part of the UN either
and how much do "member states" contribute to this provider of funds
the usa last i saw led ranks at 22 to 25% of their operational budget

if it is you are PRO UN
more power to ya
myself i question things i'm told to accept...and read right through UN agenda's and stance

reply to post by lasvegasteddy


You can tell a subject is important when the shills start doubling up and viciously denouncing info as "crap".

If Agenda 21 isn't a threat, why would they bother jumping right in and getting vicious about it?

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by MrSpad

 

They are just a bunch of extreme conspiracy theorists who have bought into their party's anti-environmentalism stance. Because it is not obvious how much corporate communists love environmental initiatives.

You have to question the mental state of anyone who is anti-smart growth.

Man I'm not sure where your coming from with all this stuff.

The issue is a basic philosophical issue on the way society should be structured. The question is whether the individual is sovereign or is the property of a centralized state.

The UN and the UN's agenda 21 is an implementation of central authority. It is an attempt to assume authority over resources, land, communities and the individual. This is what is accomplished with the agenda point blank.

There is no conspiracy here, no smoke and mirrors, this is the trend of all governments. Governments grow, gain more power, more resources and more authority as they progress. The UN is the epitome of a central authority. This agenda 21 that they have produced is an attempt to implement this authority.

Smart growth is social planning. It is not the result of sovereign individuals making decisions and progressing naturally in an environment of liberty. It is making the assumption that these people at the UN know the best way for communities to develop and have our best interest in mind. It is dangerous. It is Orwellian. It is the antithesis of freedom and individual liberty.

It is clear that your mental state is that of a serf. God help you.

Originally posted by WaKingLieFE
reply to post by FirstCasualty

 

I've been down the fear based
paradigm that gets thrown at us constantly.

It's not paranoia when they really are after you.

Have you even read the UN resolution on Agenda 21?

Originally posted by crankySamurai

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by MrSpad

 

They are just a bunch of extreme conspiracy theorists who have bought into their party's anti-environmentalism stance. Because it is not obvious how much corporate communists love environmental initiatives.

You have to question the mental state of anyone who is anti-smart growth.

Man I'm not sure where your coming from with all this stuff.

His comments are typical of the paid shills that are sent out to boards like this.

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady

Originally posted by MrSpad
I do not understand what is wrong with you people. The UN has no power over anything or anyone. The UN in fact is capable of do nothing, When you sign a UN treaty your own national laws always supersede it. Do you know why the UN has not power? Because it is just a building. Its members are nations that have their own agendas. They do whatever they want but, on occasion they come together to feed some starving people and give nations a nuetral place to talk. Beyond that it is helpless. Trust me I worked with those turkeys for awhile. Agenda 21 is a group of suggestions. Many of them good ideas but, none of the mandatory and even if they were the UN has no way to enforce things. Nations on a regular basis blow off the UN, the US included. So foe the last time if your afraid of the UN your wasting your paranoid fear and should use it on something else. Had nobody else here ever had the misfortune of working with the UN?

Nothing like UN peacekeeping force that has a bunch of nations that literaly have to call home to get persion to do anything. Hey we have enemy forces building on the southern gate, we need the Aussies and Pakis to reinforce it. Sure we just have to brief our home nations and get permission first. People afraid of a UN take over now that is a good laugh.

It is not a laughing matter. Your attempt to demean people who are aware of the issue doesn't fly with me.

Hours after U.S. President Barack Obama was re-elected, the United States backed a U.N. committee's call on Wednesday to renew debate over a draft international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global conventional arms trade.

www.reuters.com...

Just hours after the election - not significant.

Also:U.N monitoring our elections
NAACP petitions UN to stop voter-ID legislation in states

As for "peacekeeping" you want to congratulate them on a job well done?

Peacekeepers gone wild: How much more abuse will the UN ignore in Congo?
www.theglobeandmail.com...

The landmark 1996 UNICEF study The Impact of Armed Conflict on Children reported that “In 6 out of 12 country studies, the arrival of peacekeeping troops has been associated with a rapid rise in child prostitution.” A review eight years later concluded that prostitution and sexual abuse followed most UN interventions. “Even the guardians have to be guarded,” it concluded.

There is a difference between being afraid and desiring to stop evil from happening. You say UN has no way to enforce these things. Well, hand them the keys to the car and enforcement isn't necessary.

Their is no they. Their is not group of people that are the UN. You yourself are pointing out how they can not do anything right. Do you know why? Because their is no they. You could sign a UN treaty that declared nobody is allowed to say the word Hamburger. When everyone kept saying it do you know what would happen? Nothing because it has no power. Fearing Agenda 21 is like fearing even half of what is on ATS is real.

The idea is to get the US government to enforce it.

And, as governments are prone to do, the government will take every opportunity to expand it's power and reach over the US population.

So you would be for a one world gov one world currency, one world flag, one world law?

No, who said anything about that? I don't want to allow business to cover the entire earth with condos, strip malls and strip mines.

reply to post by CB328


But you support "O" who is in the Wall Street Bankster's back pocket.

Originally posted by CB328

No, who said anything about that? I don't want to allow business to cover the entire earth with condos, strip malls and strip mines.

So you would prefer favelas or shanty towns as they have in places where there is no employment?

Or government housing projects, sorry United Nations housing projects? Please do come up with an idea. So far you have only done complaining.

Here are some good links on Agenda 21

www.green-agenda.com...

www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com...

www.crossroad.to...

For a start.

Google Sustainable Development... and add your own community and find out who is doing what in your local area

go to their meetings

It does not have to be violent...just active

Originally posted by JuniorBeauchamp

Originally posted by crankySamurai

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by MrSpad

 

They are just a bunch of extreme conspiracy theorists who have bought into their party's anti-environmentalism stance. Because it is not obvious how much corporate communists love environmental initiatives.

You have to question the mental state of anyone who is anti-smart growth.

Man I'm not sure where your coming from with all this stuff.

His comments are typical of the paid shills that are sent out to boards like this.

Yes! And by the way, the term "Smart-Growth" is a classic buzzword of Agenda 21. You can find it in my links.

Originally posted by CB328

So you would be for a one world gov one world currency, one world flag, one world law?

No, who said anything about that? I don't want to allow business to cover the entire earth with condos, strip malls and strip mines.

Interestingly, it is the UN Agenda 21 which is involved in urban planning, forcing people out of single family homes and into the CONDOS and apartments they are building with their Habitat 1 programs. No private back yards for any of us because of people like you who imagine that humans are parasites.

Originally posted by Happy1
reply to post by lasvegasteddy

 

You can tell a subject is important when the shills start doubling up and viciously denouncing info as "crap".

If Agenda 21 isn't a threat, why would they bother jumping right in and getting vicious about it?

Some people may just be naive and uninformed, thinking that they and the UN are really protecting lands from evil humans and ugly development. Agenda 21 is about restricting land use and taking away private property rights. They use "conservation easements" to force people to give up part of their property, and the local govts can tell them what to do on their own land. For instance, ranchers around here where I live are not allowed to subdivide their own property because of restrictions. One developer was run out of town due to this restriction, and in that way, development of the area is restricted, jobs are not created, the people stay in POVERTY, and people have to relocate to bigger cities to survive. And that is what the Redevelopment Projects are all about. POTUS O signed a new EO creating a White House Rural Council for the express purpose of controlling land and resources in urban areas so they can run people off their lands and relocate them into the big cities where the govt can better monitor and control them.

reply to post by WaKingLieFE


First, I've read Glenn's book, and it is based on real principles espoused by UN Agenda 21. For instance, the book implicates forced relocation of people from their lands and farms and ranches and outlying areas into compounds controlled by TPTB. Energy conservation is a big part of Agenda 21, because it's propnents believe that we(especially affluent Americans) are consuming too much of a finite thing...energy...and therefore must be restricted. Agenda 21 propnents state in no uncertain terms that such things as air conditioning are "unsustainable". Glenn's book has in it that people have to "walk their boards" to generate electricity, and must generate a certain quota in order to get their daily food ration. This may sound dramatic, but it is based on real plans to ration food and electricity. Everything in the book is based on what Agenda 21 really plans to control and do in some level or fashion.
Perhaps your life is so crummy that you don't have any privacy or property to give up, but don't make the rest of us suffer just because you don't care about personal rights and freedom and property.

Really, you and others don't mind being controlled like mice and pavlov's dog?

reply to post by MrSpad


Forget even the Peacekeepers here. Local Agenda 21 does affect us on the local level. Operatives are in local governments and in NGO's making decisions, stealing lands, restricting land use, making regulations restricting how you can use your own land. This applies to a person with 1/2 acre or ranchers with hundreds of acres of land. They decide what we can do and how we develop the land, water rights, well water usage etc. It is very Draconian and Totalitarian. They are ending right to private property right under our very noses.
Why call it Communism when you can call it something like "Sustainable Development"?